Hypocrisy from TWU-ATD

[Hopeful]

Having worked with numerous GMs and Cargo GMs I never found that to be the case. Granted, I never worked with maintenance or in the NE. The NE seems to be quite a bit more adversarial.

I will say that operations managers seemed to be much less open with their employees than HDQ managers. Ops also tends to be more stratified, it was routine for analyst to go to lunch with our VP, he knew my wife's name, other analysts kid's names and took an interest in our lives. I didn't see a whole lot of that in my trips into the field.

I hope you can understand my viewpoint on this matter. All I can base my opinion on is what I see at work!

 

[Oneflyer]

I hope you can understand my viewpoint on this matter. All I can base my opinion on is what I see at work!

Sure, my opinion is based on what I see as well.

Openness and honesty are critical to keeping employees happy and clearly that is missing is your workplace.

Unfortunately, it takes a lot for a big dog to get fired at AA. That is probably the company's greatest weekness. I have no problem with good managers getting big bonuses and AA has a lot of them, but good grief dump the dead weight.

 

[Garfield1966]

Hackman, give me a break. You have one instance that you do not know all the details on (you give no facts other than "they back stabbed him) and yet you say that "you bet it’s happened …). I have been here close to 20 years in 3 different operational positions and have yet to hear of anyone hung out to dry in the manner that you referenced.

Hopeful,

I the primary benefit of having a union is not the seniority issue. If it is you are wasting your money. In the nearly 20 years I have been here, I have been in 3 separate 24 hour operations where there are shifts that start at all times of the day and vacations are taken at all times of the year. Crew skd is the smallest of the departments with 70 people. All shifts and vacations are bid in seniority order. There is no favoritism. If there are discrepancies (as there was last year) they are addressed, a decision is made and as happened last year, we re-bid from scratch.

As far as compensation goes. I disagree that some ones work experience or productivity should not have an impact on promotions, raises … etc. Longevity should not be used. If I perform better than one of my co-workers who has been here longer, I should get a better raise or be chosen for the promotion over that individual.

I guess we all have our personal stories that we have experienced. I still do not believe it is as prevalent as some would like to believe but that is just a personal observation as are yours.

I asked a FA what her dues were, and I was told $40 a month. That comes out to almost $500 a year, $5000 over 10 years and 10,000 over 20 years. Not sure the rare instances where this seems to occur and the anguish that Unions seem to cause you (as indicated by the bitching on this board) are worth that kind of money. I’d rather put it in my 401k and let it earn money for me verses a head ache.

 

[Hopeful]

Hackman, give me a break. You have one instance that you do not know all the details on (you give no facts other than "they back stabbed him) and yet you say that "you bet it’s happened …). I have been here close to 20 years in 3 different operational positions and have yet to hear of anyone hung out to dry in the manner that you referenced.

Hopeful,

I the primary benefit of having a union is not the seniority issue. If it is you are wasting your money. In the nearly 20 years I have been here, I have been in 3 separate 24 hour operations where there are shifts that start at all times of the day and vacations are taken at all times of the year. Crew skd is the smallest of the departments with 70 people. All shifts and vacations are bid in seniority order. There is no favoritism. If there are discrepancies (as there was last year) they are addressed, a decision is made and as happened last year, we re-bid from scratch.

As far as compensation goes. I disagree that some ones work experience or productivity should not have an impact on promotions, raises … etc. Longevity should not be used. If I perform better than one of my co-workers who has been here longer, I should get a better raise or be chosen for the promotion over that individual.

I guess we all have our personal stories that we have experienced. I still do not believe it is as prevalent as some would like to believe but that is just a personal observation as are yours.

I asked a FA what her dues were, and I was told $40 a month. That comes out to almost $500 a year, $5000 over 10 years and 10,000 over 20 years. Not sure the rare instances where this seems to occur and the anguish that Unions seem to cause you (as indicated by the bitching on this board) are worth that kind of money. I’d rather put it in my 401k and let it earn money for me verses a head ache.

As stated before, come to JFK in the maintenance dept. as a supervisor/general foreman.
We have a supv who has about 36 years and they bounce him around like pong ball.

 

[TWU informer]

At one time, this was about TWU Hypocrisy

 

[Hopeful]

At one time, this was about TWU Hypocrisy

Yes it was, until "general" anti union sentiment reared its head.

 

[Hackman]

Hackman, give me a break. You have one instance that you do not know all the details on (you give no facts other than "they back stabbed him) and yet you say that "you bet it’s happened …). I have been here close to 20 years in 3 different operational positions and have yet to hear of anyone hung out to dry in the manner that you referenced.

Give yourself a break kitty kat. I have a few more instances where this crap has happened to others in my AA career, nearly 20 years myself. I won't go into the ugly details, (not that you'd listen to them) but suffice it to say I worked with him, and I do know what took place sir. The bottom line is AA lost good man because he didn't play the game right. Your "operational positions" are much different from mine, to say the least.

Maybe you should take up Hopeful's offer and come out to the wonderful cutthroat world of Aircraft M@E or Line Maintenance. Then report to us how it really is, since you seem to constantly doubt what your told by those who are living it.

 

[eolesen]

I really do think that M&E is an exception to the rule when it comes to quality of their supervisors and managers, mainly because you can't take a good manager from one area and place them into a production supervisor's job or production manager's job because those positions "require" an A&P. Otherwise, I would have gladly looked at manager jobs in TUL years ago.

That's not to say that good people aren't moving into those jobs, but I think there are more than a few who are simply AMT's on a power trip and really weren't qualified to lead people. I've seen that at the L5 and L6 level when working with TUL on projects (far less so working with AFW, never worked with MCI). My gut has always said that the A&P requirement means that the gene pool for candidates is so shallow that they wind up simply pick the best of the worst in order to have a warm body in the position.

I'll defer to the AMT's on why that requirement is there, but my opinion has always been that it isn't necessary to have the license in order to manage workload or people. How many times does a manager or supervisor really have to sign off on work?


Consider this for a moment -- a large percentage of the managers and production supervisors in maintenance also held a union card at one time or another. When you promote someone out of the rank and file, friendships don't simply dissolve their because someone's pay grade changed. That in itself can lead to the appearance of a somewhat cozyier relationship between the union leaders and management.

 

[eolesen]

Sounds like the denial that Plane Business was associated with AA

As if on cue, I find it horribly funny that Holly specifically refered to you indirectly in this weeks edition of Plane Business....

... This move came shortly after we were also forced to close our message boards, which at the time were the most widely read boards that catered to the airline geek community. (Yes, you know who you are.)

I'm not going to relive specifically why it was we had to shut them down. Those of you who were around then no doubt remember. But it would be fair to say I was tired of dealing with idiots. Make that idiot. Singular. Unfortunately I was not inclined to take on the legal risks of providing a forum for the comments this particular bomb-thrower kept posting.

Ah, the memories... it's too bad that the boards were shut down, but that too shall change soon enough, or at least in a far more controlled fashion.

 

[777 fixer]

I really do think that M&E is an exception to the rule when it comes to quality of their supervisors and managers, mainly because you can't take a good manager from one area and place them into a production supervisor's job or production manager's job because those positions "require" an A&P. Otherwise, I would have gladly looked at manager jobs in TUL years ago.

That's not to say that good people aren't moving into those jobs, but I think there are more than a few who are simply AMT's on a power trip and really weren't qualified to lead people. I've seen that at the L5 and L6 level when working with TUL on projects (far less so working with AFW, never worked with MCI). My gut has always said that the A&P requirement means that the gene pool for candidates is so shallow that they wind up simply pick the best of the worst in order to have a warm body in the position.

I'll defer to the AMT's on why that requirement is there, but my opinion has always been that it isn't necessary to have the license in order to manage workload or people. How many times does a manager or supervisor really have to sign off on work?
Consider this for a moment -- a large percentage of the managers and production supervisors in maintenance also held a union card at one time or another. When you promote someone out of the rank and file, friendships don't simply dissolve their because someone's pay grade changed. That in itself can lead to the appearance of a somewhat cozyier relationship between the union leaders and management.

If you wanted someone to be a supervisor or manager on the financial side of the house you would probably want them to have some idea about finacnces correct? Well the same goes for the maintenance side of the house. And in order to get it you have to have an A&P license. I've seen where the company has hired people as supervisors how have an A&P ticket but have no experince. The general rule of thumb is that they are totally lost.

Yes personal relationships don't dissolve because somone's pay grade changes. However what happens a lot on the M&E side of the house is that management types bounch around a lot in the system.

 

[eolesen]

If you wanted someone to be a supervisor or manager on the financial side of the house you would probably want them to have some idea about finacnces correct? Well the same goes for the maintenance side of the house. And in order to get it you have to have an A&P license.

It's one thing to require analysts to have their CPA or a finance/business degree, but it doesn't take a CPA or MBA for their manager to understand a cash flow statement or a business case.

So, no, I don't think it is essential need to have worked in the position you're managing or supervising provided that the person has the aptitude to understand what it is that their direct reports do, and when to trust what their people are telling them.

We've got plenty of base managers and tech analysts in Flight who aren't pilots, yet they seem to do just fine at their jobs. Likewise, there are managers in finance who don't have finance degrees, managers in marketing who don't have marketing degrees. Hell, I have an education degree, and that hasn't stopped me from being able to manage programmers or analysts.

For M&E, as long as you've got decent tech crew chiefs and you listen and trust what they tell you, how much more is really required to supervise? Sure, there are a lot of other things involved with a supervisory position, but it doesn't take an A&P to realize someone is sleeping or leaving their work area excessively, to approve PVDs or CS's, or to review attendance.

 

[Wretched Wrench]

I've seen where the company has hired people as supervisors how have an A&P ticket but have no experince. The general rule of thumb is that they are totally lost.

Yup. In addition, a supe needs to learn and absorb the corporate culture. I have seen outsiders hired as supes who were pretty lame until they learned the ropes. Some never did. Even supes from other airlines were often lame.

 

[Garfield1966]

Fine, and then you and he can come up to crew skd and report to us how it really is, since you seem to constantly doubt what you are told by those who are living it. Sound familiar?

I cannot help but wonder if it is a bit of a self fulfilling prophesy? What I mean is here is crew skd we have no protection so we are compelled to work out or differences and watch out for each other. In job where there is protection, does it lead one to fall back on that as a safe guard instead. Or does it have something to do with the culture of the work environment? Are the folks involved in maintenance more prone to this type of behavior?

As I stated earlier I have been in 3 separate work groups and cannot really remember any instances as described above. I also believe that statistically, the evidence is on my side. I do not go around each day and sign an affidavit that ‘today, I was not harassed or treated unfairly at work’ so there is no evidence that something did not occur. Given a company of close to 100,000 people, I seriously doubt that even 1% of the work force has experienced any real bias. I emphasize real, because there are several people who I work with which I am sure are convinced that they have been treated unfairly, not knowing that they were passed over due to incompetence. I am sure FAMikey, Skymess … et al have spoken to them and can attest to this.

You have a few experiences and I have none. It proves nothing other than you work in a very hostile environment. It does seem to prove that the union and management have deep rooted problems that neither side are able or it seem capable of resolving. Mean while, I have close to $10,000 dollars more of my money in my pocket than you do. I would much rather work in an environment where I am treated fairly than in an environment where I am forced to watch my back 24/7.

 

[777 fixer]

It's one thing to require analysts to have their CPA or a finance/business degree, but it doesn't take a CPA or MBA for their manager to understand a cash flow statement or a business case.

I did'nt say anything about people having a CPA or MBA. What I said was that someone should at least have an understanding about finances. You probably would not want someone who has a hard time balancing their own checkbook in charge of the companies money.

So, no, I don't think it is essential need to have worked in the position you're managing or supervising provided that the person has the aptitude to understand what it is that their direct reports do, and when to trust what their people are telling them.

The supervisors I have seen that either one are fresh out of college with an A&P ticket or have some years at the company and then got their ticket usually have one thing in common. They are lacking as M&E supervisors. Also, how are they going to know when to "trust" thier people when they have little idea what their people actaully do?

We've got plenty of base managers and tech analysts in Flight who aren't pilots, yet they seem to do just fine at their jobs. Likewise, there are managers in finance who don't have finance degrees, managers in marketing who don't have marketing degrees. Hell, I have an education degree, and that hasn't stopped me from being able to manage programmers or analysts.

Well M&E has plenty of people in support functions that have never turned a wrench on an aircraft.

For M&E, as long as you've got decent tech crew chiefs and you listen and trust what they tell you, how much more is really required to supervise? Sure, there are a lot of other things involved with a supervisory position, but it doesn't take an A&P to realize someone is sleeping or leaving their work area excessively, to approve PVDs or CS's, or to review attendance.

You seem to be under the impression that all M&E supervisors do is approve CS's of PV's. Well they do a bit more than that.

 

[AMFAMAN]

You seem to be under the impression that all M&E supervisors do is approve CS's of PV's. Well they do a bit more than that.

That's all they should be doing, the rest should be a crew chief function.